Variances in Material Ledger

Hi experts
Can any one guide me how to analyze the single level and multilevel price variance when using material ledger. In actual costing all variances will disapear. Please provide any useful tables to do this analysis.

Hi Ahmed,
you can easily view the single- and multi-lecel price differences in the ML socuments of the closing.
Use CKMS and select the right ML transaction types (ST for single-level, MS for multi-level, or CL for the closing entries).
best regards,
                  Udo

Similar Messages

  • Variance between Material Ledger and General Ledger of

    There is again a variance between Material Ledger and General Ledger of
    7.026,64 (Tcode MB5L) as it was already in $$100036500(G/L).
    The strange thing is, that there is only a difference in the GL Account
    Balance report (FS10N) for S240077000(G/L ). In the Line Item report (FBL3N)
    all documents are available. This issue impacts at least the Balance
    carry forward negativ at the year end, because the system will forward
    the the amount of the balance for S240077000, which is now 7.026,64 to
    less.
    Ther first investigations results:
    - all Material- and FI documents are available.
    - the variances in June refer to FI-documnets 4900015286 and 4900015293.
    - the documents, e.g. 4900015292 and 4900015287, are correct and was
    posted at the same day by the same user and with the same transaction
    MI07.
    - there are no differences for the posted materials identificable from
    the other materials

    Material Ledger/Actual costing  MLAC
    MLAC is used where the FG cost varies every month due to external procurement variation.
    Ex: Jan 2011
    FG cost of manufcature internally = 100
    FG cost of procurement externally = 120 ( Company procures due to capacity constraint)
    FG Standard price at the end of month = 110...This is standard price of FG
    Due to heavy fluctuations in the month of February 2011 in procurement...
    Ex: Feb 2011
    FG cost of manufcature internally = 140
    FG cost of procurement externally = 460 ( Company procures due to capacity constraint)
    FG Standard price at the end of month = 300...This is standard price of FG.
    The variance is very high in Feb 2011 and company want to absorb this variance in Feb 2011 iteslef hence they will use MLAC.
    So if the variance is within reasonable limits company usually do not follow MLAC.
    Where as if the variance is very high company usually follow MLAC.
    In Pharma Industry usually the variance is very high on month to month basis hence they follow MLAC.
    Where as in Industrial Mahcineery Manufacturing Company the variance is with in reasonable limits hence they do not follow MLAC. Ofcourse they can use MLAC as well.
    Srinivas

  • Huge price variance in Material Ledger

    Dear Gurus,
    In our case the standard cost of one Finished goods is released with the price of Rs.10 but later on the cost of one of the Raw material is changed to Rs.1200.  Without releasing the standard cost (as it cannot be released for more than once in a period) of the Finished Goods,  we have performed Mock month end closing for Material Ledger.
    Now due to the difference in raw material cost huge variance (Rs.12000-10) is lying as unallocated variance.
    Please advise the way out as to how to correct the same at the earliest.
    Regards
    Rajya Lakshmi

    Hi,
    Thanks for the reply but in case of MR21 and MR22 also the variance will be collected on price difference account only and needs to be allocated back to the Finished Goods. 
    Against which the PRD should be knocked off is the question and how to pass the JV.
    Please Advise.
    Regards
    Rajya Lakshmi

  • Why there is an unallocated variance in Material Ledger

    Hi,
    Please see the attached screen shot :- http://wikisend.com/download/427630/value.JPG
    There is a not allocated price variance value of 463,485,277- shown under the consumption category. I want to know why this value cannot be allocated. Please help.
    Edited by: FICO Consultant on Dec 12, 2011 2:02 PM

    Hi,
    Thanks for the reply, yes i did that but none of the reasons mentioned in the note is applicable for us because we have issued all the goods receipts for all the orders, we don't have consumption to cost centers, no cycles have been cancelled during CKMLCP execution and etc. So there is no reason why it should show the unallocated variance.
    The value flow analyzer is not useful at all because it does not break down the unallocated variance and show the root cause of it. Not sure what to do...
    Is there any report which can show me the reasons to this un-allocation?

  • Material Ledger Actual costing - fully costed BOMs and variance type split

    We are in the process of activating material ledger and have 2 user
    requirements that we have not yet been able to complete. First, the
    difference between standard cost and weighted average cost needs to be
    split between the variance types (raw material purchase price, raw
    material usage, packaging price, packaging usage, etc.). Secondly we
    need a fully exploded cost itemization that supports the weighted
    average cost, similar to the costing structure pane in transaction
    ck13n.
    Do you know of any custom developement that might assist us in these
    requirements, or have any information that might help us develop a
    process to calculate these values ourselves.
    Thanks

    We are in the process of activating material ledger and have 2 user
    requirements that we have not yet been able to complete. First, the
    difference between standard cost and weighted average cost needs to be
    split between the variance types (raw material purchase price, raw
    material usage, packaging price, packaging usage, etc.). Secondly we
    need a fully exploded cost itemization that supports the weighted
    average cost, similar to the costing structure pane in transaction
    ck13n.
    Do you know of any custom developement that might assist us in these
    requirements, or have any information that might help us develop a
    process to calculate these values ourselves.
    Thanks

  • Cost of goods manufactured vs COGS+ Material ledger

    Hi Experts,
    My company is implenting Material Ledger. They want to see the actual cost of goods manufactured. We are able to develop the actual cost of goods sold in COPA. The required report is to show:
    1- Direct material used at standard + variances (price + usage) to give the actual.
    2- Direct labor (standard + variances = Actual)
    3- Manufacturing overhead ( standard + variances = Actual)
    Attached excel file is showing the requirement.
    Your guidance to develop this report by any means (Report painter, BI, other).
    Regards
    Ahmed Zain Hassan

    Hi Ahmed / Ajay.
    1. In order reports KKO0, you dont see the revaluation of ML, as you said Consumption and Activities are revaluated at  Material level, and as far as i know, theres no way to add  records that represent the revaluation.
    2. The easy way to have a Order Report revaluated at actual cost is with LIS(Logistic InfoSys), creating a Z infostructure (eg copy lis S027) that store consumption and activity QTY, and a user exit  that read the actual cost of consumed materials (depending if this is V, S2, S3) and activities and revaluate. In LIS, there are standard way to "re-post" or repopulate the infostructures. This LIS can be reported with the standard functions (ReportPainter, quers on SQ01), or create a Z tcode that show the info stored in the way you want. Problem: Not all know how to customize LIS, and also you need code in the exit.
    3.  In my country (Peru), there are lots of companies that develop a Z Kardex valuated at actual cost (because, is a legal requirement), and also create Zprograms that calculate the order at actual cost (indeed, i create this reports twice). Its a bit complex, but not impossible and depends on custo EG if you have multiple valuations, you need to write code in order to get the infor for this specific valuations.
    4. About COPA, you can post to copa the Actual Cost Component Split calculated by ML. In this CCS, you can identify the Labor, Direct Materials, and overheads.  You have 2 options, You can post the delta to the original field or have an aditional field that store the difference. This stuff is done in KE27, i see 1 example in the SCN (i guess i bookmarked). Its important to understand you dont have the detail of the delta per consumed material, just an agregated value.
    Here is the link
    http://wiki.scn.sap.com/wiki/display/ERPFI/KE27+Periodic+Valuation
    5. There is a new ML DrillDown report functionality. Indeed, i couldnt spend time analizing the solution (my test system is with EHP5 and dont plant to upload the OSS), but i guess this is the future. You can look for info with tcode KKML0 in the marketplace, also check this oss 1639462 - ERP accelerators: enhancements in ML drilldown reporting
    My questions:
    What you want?
    + Order Report, i mean Cost detaild per Order? The Actual CCS por order?
    + Material Report? I mean, the monthly average of a Fert, and its CCS ?
    + a PA Report, that show Sales (Incomes), and Costs per matiral , split by Direct, Labor and OverHead?
    Arturo.

  • Material Ledger Closing

    Dear Gurus,
    While material ledger closing using CMKLCP,i need clarification for the following process.
    1. Single/level
    2. Multilevel.
    3. Revaluation of Consumption
    4. WIP Calculation
    5.Post closing
    6. Price update.
    can anyone explain about the above process outcome, what is the difference between material ledger WIP Calculation and Production  order WIP Calculation.
    While price update for price control material S, we need to re run cost estimate or it will update the new prices.
    Appriciated for valuable inputs.
    Ramesh.

    Hi Ramesh .
    Hope you understand clearly the purpose of standard costing and why we use Material Ledger .
    Standard Costing is based on a pre-determined /derived prices for a period/year and all costs are caputed on the basis of the standard Cost . Goods Issues/Receipt , consumption all are at standard cost.
    COGS GL Account is at standard and all the inventories are at standard ..
    Difference between standard and actual costs are captured as variances in different GL Account . Mainly we have two variances... price variances ( at the time of purchases ) and usage variances at the time of production ..
    Material Ledger is a seperate module.. where it calculates the actual costs . Variances are rolled back to the consumption accounts ( which is at standard )  to derive the actual cost . Actual Cost = Standard Cost + Variances .
    1. Now  Finished Material is made of Raw Material and  Semi-Finished Goods . ...When we calculate the actual costs of finished product .. we can find out the actual costs of raw materials and semi-finished goods. ML will find out the actual cost of raw material , semi-finished goods and finished goods. This concept is know as multi-level determination ... In Single level.. only one level of material cost is computed as actual.. not rolled back to the lowest level.
    2. Revaluation of consumption during ML run means .. the COGS ( which was at standard earlier) is now being revaluted and becomes actual..
    3. WIP Calculation calculates the WIP costs on actual.
    4. Post Closing Step will put the new GL entries.. where variances will be nullified and COGS and inventory will become actual.
    5. Price Update is optional.. you can make the actual costs computed as standard cost for the next month..
    Production Order WIp Calculation = Actual Qty X Standard Rate
    ML WIP Calculation =  Actual Qty x Actual Rate
    Please revert back for any further clarifications
    Regards
    Sarada

  • Material Ledger - Closing Postings

    Dear Material Ledger Experts,
    I need to clear my concepts regarding Material Ledger Closing Postings :
    Standard Price of Finished Goods : $10
    Produced Units via Process Order: 1000 Units
    Variance Settled to P&L Accounts : $1 Per Unit
    P.G.I Units : (300 Units)
    By the end of the month, I have executed end to end Material Ledger Closing Run and it updates all materials involved in the production of Finished Goods:
    Date : 30.06.2014 (End of Month)
    Raw Material Inventory : Increased.
    Packing Material Inventory: Increased.
    Revaluation of COGS of 300 Units : Increased.
    Date : 01.07.2014 (Start of Next Month)
    Raw Material Inventory : Decreased.(by the same amount)
    Packing Material Inventory: Decreased.(by the same amount)
    System updates Inventory held which is 700 units as well as inventory sold which is 300 units.
    Now my cause of concern is regarding revaluation of COGS of 300 units sold on which already variances were calculated at the time of process order settlement:
    Variance Settlement @ Process Order Settlement : 1$ X 300 Units.
    Revaluation of COGS at month end                       : 1$ X 300 Units (again)
    Which causes duplication of cost on P&L Accounts.
    Please guide me regarding this issue and work around to solve this
    Thanks in Advance !
    Regards,
    Zain Bashir

    Dear Bulut,
    At the time of variance settlement, following entries were posted :
    Production Efficiency Variance (Dr) <P&L>
    Inventory Change (Cr) <P&L>.
    and at the time of COGS Revaluation, following entries were posted :
    COGS (Dr) <P&L>
    Material Ledger Clearing Account (Cr) <P&L>
    Regards,
    Zain Bashir

  • Standard Price in Material Ledger

    Dear Gurus,
    On one hand we need to update on finished products (manufactured) a standard cost estimate (CK11N or CK40N) in order to analyse variances on the corresponding production orders (during period en closing with KKS2 transaction), on another hand, because we are implementing material ledger component, we would like to update the standard price of these finished products with the periodic unit price (PUP) with CKME transaction.
    The problem is that the system returns an error when we try to release the price with the PUP,
    CKPRCH "A current or future standard price exists for material &".
    Could you help me ? Thank you very much
    Christophe

    Hi
    I suspect standard price can only be saved once for any period. You can make use of the other price fields in the material master to store different prices
    Thank You,

  • Material Ledger : Actual Cost settlement to Consumption Accounts

    Dear CO Experts,
    We are aware that when we run CKMLCP, all variances (in the Price Diff GL Account) due to Material Prices flutuation, diff in Standard & Actual Cost of Production, etc. would finally get settled to Consumption or Stock Account in its appropriate ratios.
    Consumption Acount GL is a Cost Element with Cost Category as 1.
    There can be cases, when there are diferences in Production Order, due to fluctuations in Prices or Actual consumption is more than standard consumption.
    When a Production Order is settled the difference is posted to Price Diff Account.
    When a Material Ledger (Actual Costing) is executed, Price Diff Account is targetted to be Zero. The Price Diff is then splitted in Stock & Consumtion Account in its appropriate ratios.
    Main Question :
    Since, Consumption Acount GL is a Cost Element with Cost Category as 1, what shall be the CO Account Assignment Object, when the ML value is settled to Consumption Accounts.

    hi merchant..
       1. Price diff between stnd and act is initially goes to PRD a/c through OBYC setting at the time of GR/Invoiceing/Issue if mat is set as S&3.
       2. In case of mat set as V&2 idially there should not be any diff but may arise some small amount due to "no or less stock qty" at the time of invoicing.
      3. When CKMLCP is run these price diff & order settlement diff splitted to cons and stock as you mentioned.
    Now your question :
      " Since, Consumption Acount GL is a Cost Element with Cost Category as 1, what shall be the CO Account Assignment Object, when the ML value is settled to Consumption Accounts"
        Cons GL is cost element cat 1 for capturing mat mov for Issues to orders/cost centres,oth co obj for primary posting at stnd price.
        Now at the time of CKMLCP run you revaluate the materials and price diff are splitted to cons & stock and goes to mat to calculate act cost (stnd +/- prd).
    I think this will give you some light on your issue.
      kkumar

  • Material ledger 643 movement type showing up under cost center

    Hello everybody
    We are in the process of implementing the material ledger.
    We have two processes of stock transfer in our system
    1. Plant to plant- mvmt type 641/101 (intracompany ) which ML is recognizing as stock transfer
    2. Cross company STO- mvmt type 643/101 (intercompany) which ML is putting it under cost center and not as stock transfer
    As the number 2 scenario is also stock transfer and we are seeing under cost center bucket we are not able to join the PGI document to the recieving site and vice versa of the GR to the supplying site. Hence have a problem to transfer variances too.
    So is there any way-to make the cross company stock transfer also as a stock transfer in ckm3.
    Appreciate it.
    Sankara

    Hi
    Your requirement class settings must have had sales order as a cost object
    1. Go to sale order, procurement tab
    2. Check whats the req type
    3. Go to OVZH and check whats the req class assigned to this req type
    4. Go to OVZG and check whats the acount assignment cateory in req class.. I think it is E
    You should use a proper req class/type to avoid this error
    br, Ajay M

  • Material Ledger activation (COML) - multiple plants in single company code.

    Hi -
    Material Ledger activation (COML)- multiple plants in single company code.
    In large mfg plant - process industry (proposed to dived into number of production plants), Matrial 'a'  is produced in plant 'a'.Material 'a' is input to procude matl 'B' in plant 'B"..so on and so forth.
    We are activating Material Ledger (COML) for actual costing purpose. Question -During multi level price determination, will the variance of lower level materials ( produced in lowerlevel /other plants in our case) be rolled up to higher level materials (in a different plant). please let me know if it really works, if yes what are the guidelines (if any) .
    Please advise ASAP.
    Thanks
    Chris
    Edited by: Chris Farr on Oct 23, 2008 11:12 AM

    Hi Chris,
    from a business point of view there is a  difference that you might take into consideration: The valauation level will always be on material and plant combination. That means, the division into several virtual plants will usually lead to different actual prices for the same material in each plant. That might happen for example when you carry over stocks from last month into the current month in one plant, while the other plant has only receipts from the current month.
    That might me desired, but often it is not. If the mutiple plants are in reality only one location it might be hard to explain why the prices differ between plants.
    best regards,  Udo

  • 3 valuations in Material ledger

    Hi,
    My client's requirement is as follows:
    1) Legal valuation has to be in Local currency but on Actual Costing
    2) Profit Center Valuation in Local currency but on standard costing - same as Group valuation
    3) Group Valuation in Group currency in standard costing - Group valuation
    Is this possible when, Actual costing Material ledger implemented?
    I imagin, Legal valuation field in Material Master will be updated by periodic unit price when we run CKMLCP.  Then Profit center valuation field in the Material Master will be updated when we run CK40N in standard costing PC valuation costing run.  Then again we will run ck40n in standard costing for Group valuation to update Group valuation in Material Master.
    If my client opts to run ck40n for legal valuation, then he should also be able to mark and release standard cost new price, in Legal valuation field of material master and actual costing will not release standard price for new period.
    The requirement is typically complicated, as my client wants to maintain his Global template, though one country comes under actual costing requirement.
    I would like to dig out answers from real time experience please.
    Cheers,
    Ashok

    I can give you some information but not everything.  I have gone through the deployment of material ledger using 3 valuations, but not the ones you are using.  We used Local, Group and Group at Group.  All 3 are at actual costing.  What this means is that the local currency is the currency in the country where the plant exists.  The group valuation is a straight conversion to US dollars from the local currency based on the currency conversion tables M and P rates.  Note that both of these first two currencies can include intercompany profit if reflected on the transferring sales order between companies.  The Group at Group is the US dollar conversion without the intercompany profit.  We find this works for our business.
    The other thing about material ledger is that you need to have a standard cost estimate so that material ledger can keep track of the cos component structure.  The way it works is as follows:
    Say the standard estimate shows labor=$100, materials=$200 and overhead=$300 for a total cost of $600.  All transactions in the month using this material use the $600 standard.  Now, when material ledger is run at month end, the PUP (periodc unit price) is calculated and let us assume the PUP values are labor=$150, materials=$250, overhead=$350 for a total PUP of $750.  Material ledger already has tables with the details of the standard components against every transaction.  Now it will apply the remaining adjustments totalling $150 to the proper cost components for COPA purposes.  This is pushed to COPA using transaction KE27.  Think of it like this...Actual cost is equal to standard ($600) plus/minus variances ($150). 
    Therefore, you always should have a standard cost estimate when using material ledger.  At least that is my usage and understanding.  I hope I provided useful information for you in some way.
    David

  • Material Ledger x IFRS x Depreciation

    Hi All
    In South America companies are used to run actual costing run (CKMLCP) to valuate the stock with actual price. This actual price uses local depreciation method in their depreciation activity.
    Due consolidation purposes and IFRS requirements companies also must report the stock of materials using other depreciation methods.
    In few words, we have to maintain the actual cost but change the "local" depreciation cost to "IFRS" depreciation. It´s an additional material ledger.
    So far I know you can do it using the following scenarios:
    1) Develop a custom report that recalculates your material ledger (CKM3 massive).
    2) Use IFRS as local depreciation, calculates a difference from local depreciation, make a posting, run CKMLCP and reverse.
    3) Use Alternative Valuation Run (CKMLCPAVR) besides regular CKMLCP to have an additional actual price for materials using different stock valuation method or parallel valuation ledgers.
    I´m very interested in the third scenario but until now nobody has implemented it.
    Pls let me know your opinion and thanks for your cooperation
    Frederick Ramos
    SAP CO Consultant
    Brazil

    Hi,
    We had a similar requirement. And we decided to use Delta version (with a bit of a twick ;-).
    It's based on the principle that we want to calculate different activity prices in different versions (0 and delta) using different splitting structures. We want to use the same data posted only once in version 0 (primary, secondary and production confirmations). However in one version you include depraciation CE from main dep. area and in delta version you include depraciation CE from IFRS (I presume you can post both depreciations into CO with different cost elements).
    Then we use AVR which references delta version for activity prices.
    I only prototyped it and this solution was not fully tested yet. So let me know if you encounter any problems.
    Step by step description of the solution below:
    1. Transaction OKEQN
        a) Create a delta version referencing version 0. Make it valid for actuals, plan and variance.
        b) Under Controlling Area Settings -> Settings for Each Fiscal Year -> Price calculation Tab set revaluation to 0 u2013 u201CDo not
             revalueu201D. Otherwise in CKMLCPAVR price cal we get error KP291.
            Please see SAP note 420366. Note 420366 - Error in cumulation actual price in ML delta versions
        c) Under Controlling Area Settings -> Delta Version: Transfer Business Trans. from Ref. Version thick all the boxes for actual.
             This setting defines which transactions are REFERENCED from version 0. Transactions are grouped per check box. If a
             box is checked a group of CO business transactions is treated as to be referenced from version 0.
             If a box is not checked a group of CO business transactions is not referenced from version 0 but can be executed
             explicitly for delta version.
             The logic here is that table TKA09V contains CO business transactions which can be explicitly executed for delta version.
             CO business transactions which are not in TKA09V are referenced from version 0 and must NOT be executed explicitly
             for delta version.
             Check box u201CActivity allocationu201D controls several CO business transactions which are related to activities, amongst them
             RKL - Actual activity allocation.
             So if we want to use in delta version the same activity quantities confirmed in version 0 we need to tick this box.
             However ticking this box also controls CO business transaction KSII - Actual price calculation.
             In other words if we tick for actuals box u201CActivity allocationu201D neither activity RKL nor KSII can be executed explicitly in
             delta version. Both transactions are referenced form version 0.
             So now if we try to execute Actual activity price calculation for delta version we get an error:
             "Message no. KI506
             Transaction KSII for version YYY is not permitted"
    However what we want is to reference activity quantities from version 0 AND to execute activity price calculation explicitly for delta version (using dedicated splitting structure with IFRS depreciation cost elements included).
    In order to achieve the above (and avoid KI506 in KSII) I had to u201Cmanuallyu201D maintain table TKA09V. I just manually entered entry KSII - Actual price calculation for delta version. This way I can calculate actual activity prices separately for delta version using quantities (and costs) already posted in version 0 and dedicated splitting structure.
    d) Create additional splitting structure as per your alternative valuation needs (transaction OKES).
        For delta version assign your cost centres to this new splitting structure (transaction OKEW).
       So now we are ready to execute actual activity price calculation for delta version in transaction KSII.
    In my testing everything went as expected. Actual activity prices for delta version were calculated according to new splitting structure and saved in table COST.
    e) Create AVR and specify delta version as u201CVersion for Price for Cumulation in Legal Valuationu201D. Specify 7 u2013 Actual price for  the period.
    In my testing system used the correct price from delta version.
    NOTE: Do not use "Determine Actual Prices" activity in CKMLCPAVR but calculated activity pricers for Delta verrsion in KSII.
    Good luck,
    Szymon

  • Material Ledger Close (CKMLCP) -problem executing during the month

    Due to our tight closing schedule, we are attempting to pre-run the Material Ledger close (CKMLCP) process and Value Flow Monitor (CKMVFM) on the last 2 days of the month in order to catch any issues before the first workday of the close, when it is too late to do many of the normal processes that would correct the problems in our system.  The issue we are having is that some of our production plants are 24/7 and we are not getting good results in our test run due to new transactions that get posted while we are running the CKMLCP steps, resetting the material statuses.  For example between the Single level and multi level calculations for a given material, a goods movement might get posted that resets the material status from "single level calculated" back to "quantities and values entered", which leads to errors when the multilevel calculation tries to roll up the WAC variances.
    Has anyone encountered this issue, and how did you get around it?  Currently, we can only think of locking people out of the system while we are running the pre-checks, but we know the users will balk at that suggestion. 
    Thanks,
    Burns Thomas

    Hi Thomas,
    you might try to use the alternative valuation run as a simulation environment.
    [http://help.sap.com/saphelp_erp60/helpdata/en/d2/cb532d455611d189710000e8322d00/frameset.htm]
    an alterantive valuation run for just one month will create a copy of the ML data in which you will have no problem with material status. the calculation logic for closing is the same, also the reporting, like CKMVFM. Therefore, If you are successfull in closing the AVR that is a good indcator for not having further problems for your real data.
    best regards,
                         Udo

Maybe you are looking for